English Orders in Council, 1807.
The first Order in Council[268] only contained certain regulations under which the trade to and from the enemy’s country should thereafter be carried on. The second order,[269] 17th of January, 1807, set forth that “whereas the sale of ships by a belligerent to a neutral is considered by France to be illegal; and whereas a great part of the shipping of France and of her allies has been protected from capture during the present hostilities by transfers or pretended transfers to neutrals; and whereas it is fully justifiable to adopt the same rule, in this respect, towards the enemy which is applied by the enemy to this country,” his Majesty in Council consequently orders “that in future the sale to a neutral of any vessel belonging to the enemy shall not be deemed to be legal, nor in any manner to transfer the property, nor to alter the character of such vessel; and all vessels now belonging, or which shall hereafter belong, to any enemies of his Majesty, notwithstanding any sale or pretended sale to a neutral, after a reasonable time shall have elapsed for receiving information of this order, at the place where such sale or pretended sale was effected, shall be captured and brought in, and shall be adjudged as lawful prize to the captors.”
Preamble of third Order in Council.
Terms of this Order.
The third, and far the most important order, issued on the 11th November, 1807, declared the absolute blockade of his Majesty’s dominions, and of all countries under their control, with certain exceptions which were specified. The much criticised preamble recited that “whereas certain orders establishing an unprecedented system of warfare against this kingdom, and aimed especially at the destruction of its commerce and resources, were some time since issued by the government of France, by which the British Islands were declared to be in a state of blockade, thereby subjecting to capture and condemnation all vessels, with their cargoes, which should continue to trade with his Majesty’s dominions: and whereas by the same orders, all trading in English merchandise is prohibited; and every article of merchandise belonging to England, or coming from her colonies, or of her manufacture, is declared lawful prize:” and whereas “the nations in alliance with France, and under her control, were required to give, and have given, and do give, effect to those orders: and whereas his Majesty’s order of the 9th of January last,[270] has not answered the desired purpose, either of compelling the enemy to recall those orders, or of inducing neutral nations to interpose with effect to obtain their revocation; but, on the contrary, the same have been recently enforced with increased rigour: and whereas his Majesty, under these circumstances, finds himself compelled to take further measures for asserting and vindicating his just rights, and for supporting that maritime power which the exertions and valour of his people have, under the blessing of Providence, enabled him to establish and maintain; and the maintenance of which is not more essential to the safety and prosperity of his Majesty’s dominions, than it is to the protection of such States as still retain their independence, and to the general intercourse and happiness of mankind: his Majesty is therefore pleased” to order “that all ports and places of France, their allies, or of any other country at war with his Majesty, and all other ports and places in Europe, from which, although not at war with his Majesty, the British flag is excluded, and all ports and places in the colonies belonging to the enemy, shall from henceforth be subject to the same restrictions, in point of trade and navigation, with the exceptions hereinafter mentioned, as if the same were actually blockaded by his Majesty’s naval forces in the most strict and vigorous manner.”
Neutrals.
All trade in articles or manufactures of such countries was declared unlawful; and “every vessel trading from or to the said countries or colonies, together with all goods and manufactures and merchandise on board, shall be captured and condemned as prize to the captors.[271] His Majesty being desirous, nevertheless, not to subject neutrals to any greater inconvenience than is absolutely inseparable from carrying into effect a just determination to counteract the designs of his enemies, and to retort upon them the consequences of their own violence and injustice, and being yet willing to hope that it may be possible (consistently with that object) still to allow neutrals the opportunity of furnishing themselves with colonial produce for their own consumption and supply; and even to leave open for the present such trade with the enemy as shall be carried on directly with the ports of his Majesty’s dominions, or of his allies,” makes exceptional certain places and points which are there recited.
In this order the falsification of certificates of origin was specially dealt with, and vessels carrying such simulated papers were declared lawful prizes. On the 18th of November another Order in Council was issued approving the draft of instructions to the commanders of H.M. ships of war and privateers to carry out the previous order. On the 25th of November additional orders and instructions were issued, containing supplemental provisions, and specifying the periods at which the Orders in Council of the 11th of November should come into operation at distant ports of the world; and, on the 18th of December, 1807, further supplemental orders were promulgated, all directed to carry out the views of government in the West Indian colonies and in the Mediterranean.[272]
The Order in Council[273] of the 11th of November is referred to even in the present day as a justification of the Berlin Decree. It ought, however, to be remembered, by those who desire to question the character of England for uprightness, that the Prussian government had previously in a forcible and hostile manner taken possession of the electorate of Hanover, and had notified “that all British ships should be excluded from the ports of the Prussian dominions, and from certain other ports in the north of Europe, and not suffered to enter or trade therein;” and had further declared (5th of April, 1806) “that no ship or vessel belonging to any of his Majesty’s subjects be permitted to enter or clear from any ports of Prussia, and that a general embargo or stop be made of all ships and vessels, at that time, or which should hereafter come into any of the ports, harbours, or roads of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland, together with all persons and effects on board the said ships and vessels.” Surely, considering the circumstances of the King of Prussia’s perfidy,[274] this Order in Council must be deemed justifiable.
The Order in Council of the 16th May, 1806, whereby all the ports from the Elbe to Brest were declared to be strictly blockaded, contained a proviso “that this blockade shall not extend to neutral vessels having on board merchandise not belonging to the enemies of his Majesty, and not contraband of war; except, however, the coast from Ostend to the mouth of the river Seine, which is hereby declared subject to a blockade of the strictest kind.” This Order in Council, which the French pronounced “barbarous,” and “a paper blockade,” etc., was actually signed by Charles James Fox himself, nor can there be any doubt that the coasts thus declared in a state of blockade were in the strictest sense subject to such declaration, since the perils of leaving the harbours embraced in it were such that hardly any one of even the enemy’s armed vessels ventured to incur them. Considering the circumstances of the times, and that Napoleon was then organising a European confederacy in order to fall upon England with his whole concentrated power, it must be admitted that the Whig Order in Council was not only justifiable by the law of nations, but imperatively called for by expediency. Orders providing for the blockade of harbours and coasts which it was at the moment in the highest degree perilous to enter, and for the interim detention of the Prussian cargoes, in retaliation for the unprovoked invasion of Hanover by the Prussian troops, and the exclusion of British commerce, all brought about by the direct intrigues of Napoleon, were clearly within the law of nations, and, moreover, seem now to have been, at the time and under the circumstances, a very moderate exercise of the rights of a belligerent. To attempt to palliate the Berlin Decrees on the grounds of the “barbarous” character of the previous Orders in Council, was obviously “a weak invention” of the enemy.[275]